• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

No Rings, No Drama, Just Dominion

Kilian

Kilian

Member
Male

00000000 - THUMBNAILS.png​

SUMMARY:​

In a legal world where marriage has become a trap for men—laden with financial peril, court-imposed fatherlessness, and zero covenantal clarity—Kilian’s bold new article, “No Rings, No Drama, Just Dominion,” explores the rise of fraternal unions: legal, non-sexual “marriages” between straight men who are choosing strategy over sentiment.

This is not satire—it’s survival. Kilian draws sharp lines between Biblical marriage under moral law and state unions under legal fiction, arguing that the modern marriage regime no longer honors headship, provision, or covenant. With scriptural depth and legal precision, he defends the legitimacy of men tactically navigating state systems without surrendering biblical convictions.

From the collapse of state-defined marriage to the rise of celibate covenant brotherhoods, the article explores how two men—Daniel and Eli—forge a household not of lust, but of dominion. It’s not rebellion. It’s realism.

Each section exposes how modern monogamy is enforced by ideology, not Scripture; and how even strategic legal fictions reveal the longing for a covenant structure long abandoned. Kilian issues a clear challenge: stop condemning what Scripture permits, and start building what the state has forsaken—righteous households governed by Torah, not bureaucracy.

📖 To read the full article, visit the blog here:
👉 NO RINGS, NO DRAMA, JUST DOMINION: FRATERNAL UNIONS AND THE COLLAPSE OF MODERN MARRIAGE
 
Kilian, I made this point about a year ago that God fearing men should enter into a state marriage license arrangement with other God fearing men to protect themselves from the common law statute that is on the books in many states. If a man were to be legally married prior to bringing in a either one or more female spouse/s, then any divorce that might happen in the future would be based on the specifics of their ketubah and the state legal system could not step in and declare the ketubah void based on any perceived imbalance that it might have. If a man were to marry three women and they each chose to divorce him and they each got half, it wouldn't leave him enough to live on for himself. Knowing this, his wives would know that the first one out the door would receive the state supported divorce procedures which often include alimony etc, which would produce a desire to ensure that they are the first ones out the door. This would reduce their desire to work through issues within the marriage and pressure them to leave.

The bottom line, the pre-existing "state issues marriage license" to another man provides protections to men against the imbalance of family court towards men today.

Kudo's on a great article!!
 
theleastofthese said:
"Sorry honey we can't get legally married but I married my male best friend." 😳
Click to expand...
not a marriage in the eyes of God. A marriage license according to the state.

A state license to protect oneself against the state for a real marriage.

Also.... Two straight men.. This would never be consummated! :-)
 
Man_in_the_Middle said:
not a marriage in the eyes of God. A marriage license according to the state.

A state license to protect oneself against the state for a real marriage.

Also.... Two straight men.. This would never be consummated! :-)
Click to expand...
Yes, I understand. I just don't see that one going over well or not being met with other suspicions. I'll leave it at that, lol
 
Celibate & the City
Brotherly Ever After
Dude, Where's My Marriage?
Platonic Panic
Menage à Law
Friends with (Legal) Benefits
Legally Bound and Down
Brokeback Bureaucracy
Covenant Cowboys
Frat Pack: No Strings Attached
Two Guys, One Covenant
Brotherly Love: The Pre-Nup Edition
The Matrimony Trap: Bros Gone Rogue
Covenant & Chill
Legally Bros
Just the Tip (of Legal Loopholes)
 
IndianaLife said:
Celibate & the City
Brotherly Ever After
Dude, Where's My Marriage?
Platonic Panic
Menage à Law
Friends with (Legal) Benefits
Legally Bound and Down
Brokeback Bureaucracy
Covenant Cowboys
Frat Pack: No Strings Attached
Two Guys, One Covenant
Brotherly Love: The Pre-Nup Edition
The Matrimony Trap: Bros Gone Rogue
Covenant & Chill
Legally Bros
Just the Tip (of Legal Loopholes)
Click to expand...
Thanks for the awesome selection. I choose.....

"Legally Bros"


lol
 
IndianaLife said:
So fraud and what sounds pretty gay to me "bro, I can't find anyone, let's get married and build an empire while we wait for wives to want us".
Click to expand...
Is it fraud? In what way? The state does not require consummation.

What legal requirements would not be met?
 
Man_in_the_Middle said:
Is it fraud? In what way? The state does not require consummation.

What legal requirements would not be met?
Click to expand...
Legal marriages come with certain legal benefits/protections that have tax implications, healthcare implications, death benefit implications, etc.

Marrying your bro to have a run around on the government is fraud umpteen different ways.
 
IndianaLife said:
Legal marriages come with certain legal benefits/protections that have tax implications, healthcare implications, death benefit implications, etc.

Marrying your bro to have a run around on the government is fraud umpteen different ways.
Click to expand...
the supreme court ruled that managing your affairs to avoid taxation is not fraud.
I think this is the same thing. Taking advantage of legal loopholes is legal.

If you can think of one legally definable fraud, throw it out there. I am willing to chew on this a little more! :-)
 
Man_in_the_Middle said:
the supreme court ruled that managing your affairs to avoid taxation is not fraud.
I think this is the same thing. Taking advantage of legal loopholes is legal.

If you can think of one legally definable fraud, throw it out there. I am willing to chew on this a little more! :-)
Click to expand...

It's a marriage of convenience to gain some sort of legal benefit, which is not a legal marriage. While the act of marrying itself may be legal, the underlying intent to deceive or exploit the marriage is not.
 
IndianaLife said:
While the act of marrying itself may be legal, the underlying intent to deceive or exploit the marriage is not.
Click to expand...

The underlying intent to deceive or exploit. Can you point to ANY law that says this?

The only law I have found has to do with marrying someone from another country in order to get them into our country using the marriage as a shortcut to the process.

If the government does not define the other intents as a crime, then it is not a crime.... No?
 
IndianaLife said:
the underlying intent to deceive or exploit the marriage is not.
Click to expand...
How is the honest use of a marriage license to gain tax benefits an attempt to deceive? They are pretending to be a gay couple, sure. Unless the State has a say in how often they have sex - which it doesn't - in the eyes of the State they're as much a gay couple as any other gay couple.

Gay marriage is already this ridiculous. As gay sex is legal, and gay couples cannot procreate, the sole purpose of a gay marriage license IS the legal, social and tax benefits of such an arrangement. Those are explicitly what any gay couple is seeking when getting a license - they're not getting a license to have gay sex, that's already legal, they're getting a license to get other benefits. So how can it be deceptive to seek those other benefits, when that's the whole point of the license in the first place? It's no more ridiculous than a couple of men who do like to sleep together getting the same license.
 
In this case why don’t we just do what Nick Davis of Seeking Sister Wives does and have the women get legally married
 
I can see the impact climate change is having on this discussion. There could also be evidence of covid here... . Is anyone else worried about the impending disasters?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top